Re: Poll: Both ends behind NAT...

On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 10:05:34PM +0100, Johannes Poehlmann wrote:
> There is no problem, as long you control the NAT router. 
> 

The current NAT-supporting versions of speakfreely work fine if the
NATs are cooperative (which is generally the case).  The only
requirement is that you know the network address of the remote party,
and this can be done via LWL.

Technique if both parties are behind NAT:
- Both parties must use NAT versions of speakfreely
    - UNIX: standard 7.6a  with -NAT option
    - Windows: http://www.2pi.info/software/sf_speex/index.html
- Parties make contact via an IM system (jabber, icq, msn, yahoo, aim
    etc.) for presence notification.
- Both register with a LWL server and both initiate contact with the other
(LWL is not necessary if you have other means of determining the other
party's external IP address)

packets should then traverse the NATs in both directions.

> 
> John Walker was pessimistic, so he stopped his work with speak freely.
> In a very clean way I want to say, everything neatly archived, and a 
> clear timetable. 
> 

John has done a great job over many years, and has decided it's time
to finish up.  No problems.  I think he has painted the NAT problems a
bigger than they are though.  In reality it's not likely a big
problem, and we have solution to it.

> 
> On Sun, Aug 03, 2003 at 01:36:39AM -0700, Tom Scott wrote:
> > My partner and I use SF behind NAT routers on both ends. He has a DSL
> > modem that converts a public address to several local addresses, I have
> > to use ISDN (anything faster not available in our rural area) with a
> > similar setup. We had considerable trouble getting SF working at first,
> > but with perseverance we found a way. I had to tell my Netgear RT-328 to
> > forward all unrecognized packets to one private address and make sure
> > that my box was at that address. But that's simply a limitation of my
> > ISDN router. A smarter router could easily make this  more flexible. 
> > 

With the NAT-enabled speakfreely versions most end-user NATs should
work fine with no configuration.  Linux IP Masquerading works with no
additional rules, and I expect that windows network connection sharing
also does.  I understand that modern routers are also playing nicely
too.

Soren

                      * * *

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send E-mail containing
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body (*not* as the
Subject) to [email protected]